Informed by theoretical considerations distinguishing "visual culture" from "art history" as articulated by W. J. T. Mitchell, this essay compares the editorial programs of two neonatal, overlapping, yet distinct journals: Ars Judaica and Images. The essay concludes by considering passages from two medieval Jewish authorities, Joseph Albo and Judah Alharizi, that suggest new horizons in criticism made possible by Images. Among these horizons are "investigations of the negative and repellent."

Welcoming Images: Medievally

The Cambridge History of Jewish Philosophy: The Modern Era

The student of modern Jewish political theory is immediately faced with what may seem an insurmountable problem: almost all modern Jewish philosophers claim that Judaism is not centrally concerned with politics. By this they do not deny that Jewish people have been, and are, involved in modern political life. Rather, they claim that Judaism as Judaism was not historically and is not today concerned with political life. Zionist and non-Zionist Jewish thinkers have both made this claim. For Zionists, Zionism is the rejection of the nonpolitical character of Judaism and the Jewish past. Different as they are, Moses Hess, arguably the first socialist Zionist, and Zvi Yehudah Kook, arguably the first religious Zionist, agree that Jews need to throw off the shackles of exile in order to return Jews and Judaism to the political life of the Jewish nation. In contrast, for non-Zionists, such as Moses Mendelssohn, Hermann Cohen, and Franz Rosenzweig, the nonpolitical character of Judaism allows Jews and Judaism to coexist with (either comfortably with or alienated from) their contemporary political realities. In this way, the Zionist and non-Zionist positions are two sides of the same coin. And clearly, if Judaism is by definition not political, then the attempt to articulate a modern Jewish political theory of any sort would be meaningless at best.

Political Theory: Beyond Sovereignty?

Aesthetics and Art

The Spirit of Jewish History

The project of “Jewish textual reasoning,” understood to constitute the practice of a subcommunity of contemporary Jewish philosophers, and also “scriptural reasoning,” a related practice engaging Jewish readers with their Abrahamic cousins, is to write from back to front, to begin at the end. This writing with a purpose already in view is not to be “subjective” but to avoid either of two more usual approaches. The more typical academic approach is to trace some practice from historical beginning to end and to seek “objectivity,” which usually means to uncover a narrative that anyone who worked diligently would uncover because it corresponds best to “what is really there.” One “subjective” alternative is to proffer some religious or political ideology and then present a historical sampling of events or texts as proofs that the ideology is true because it – or the corrective need for it – is illustrated by the sampling. This chapter follows a third approach: assuming that the history – in this case, of modern Jewish philosophy – yields several plausible narratives, each of which provides a reasonable account of the overall trajectory of this history. A reasonable narrative can be described in the language of “truth” (' emet ) when its author's community of inquiry and practice judges it worthy of “trust” (' emunah ), as a narrative that helps deepen or strengthen or repair the community's life in this world.

Welcoming Images: Medievally

Citations

The Cambridge History of Jewish Philosophy: The Modern Era

Political Theory: Beyond Sovereignty?

Aesthetics and Art

The Spirit of Jewish History

Scripture and Text

Related Papers (5)

The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories

Critique of Pure Reason: Remark to the amphiboly of concepts of reflection

Being Israeli: Fragmented citizenship in a colonial frontier society

Emmanuel levinas (1906-1995)

The Book of Tobit: Texts from the Principal Ancient and Medieval Traditions. With Synopsis, Concordances, and Annotated Texts in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Syriac